First - I'm all for the Miata......Dave: Did you miss this back on 9/28/11 when I submitted this to the CRB along with a list of other items?

- Request: Please reclassify the following vehicles to SSC:
Mazda MX-5 /Miata (01-05) (No Comp package - No LSD) at 2,600 lbs - There are numerous Mazda Miatas built that can run in this class. If these cars were allowed to run, as the membership requested last year, our class would have had great participation numbers and not been placed on probation.

Second - As for Spec B, I hope it works out and becomes as big as Spec Miata - BUT NOT AT THE EXPENSIVE OF KILLING SCCA''S ENTRY LEVEL CLASS. Again, I could care less about a 2.5 rule....from a business standpoint the club needs an entry level class PERIOD - that class is SSC. If 1 car a year shows up to race, then so be it. We are forcing core members and drivers away from the club and discouraging the entry of new drivers with the high cost of entry into this club.

Guys, the Spec B formula is nothing new. Look at the Toyota Pirelli Cup back in 2004....similar concept with a PRO SERIES and that couldn't survive??? The cars cost $20,000 Canadian back then (that was like $2.00 US right?), they had a Pro venue as a support race and after 3 years contract ended and poof....

I'm not sure what the overall answer is BUT think about this.....when a business needs to sell more product do they throw it out into the garbage? NO, a business advertises, promotes and provides incentives to sell their product. Why as a club (members and board members) are we so eager to kill our own??? When Pro Racing needed help, the club promoted it with money from Solo and Club Racing (read the old financial documents of the club)......they took the time and effort to promote the series they believed in. Maybe its time for the visionaries of the club (that would be the people at the SCCA home office and on the board we entrust with these decisions) to see that 10,000 foot view and come up with a successful Marketing plan to maintain and grow the classes we have....

Subsidized entry fees for SS racing? How many SSC &amp; SSB cars would the club see at events if there were subsidized entry fees?

Moving cars around or letting some older ones back in?

No entry fee for any SS driver doing more than 4 races?

Maybe ALL these ideas and more giving the class a real shot in the arm??? Think stimulus and jump starting the classes again. THIS CLUB AND CLASSES ARE NOT DEAD YET! And remember...there are more classes than just SS that have number problems.....

FYI - We will be starting TWO Spec B builds at our shop shortly....shhhhhhh :-)

BillSeifertBasic MemberPosts:226

22 Oct 2011 11:00 AM

Hey, I forgot the email address for the CRB. I want to put my 2 cents in on Miatas being allowed in SSC, and I really would like to see my 99-2000 Civic SI get one more year of National racing. I ain't going to buy a Spec B, till I know what to get, and even our Northwest Div will be in action before the SCCA is through screwing with the rules. I doubt I will buy a current SSC, because I can't afford to climb on a sinking ship. I've found a really good SSC car, and I would love to get it, but I am too afraid to buy it with the doubt in the class.

I've figured out the rjohnson999 thingie. Just turn the numbers upside down, and that's him.

This way you can get confirmation and track the progress of your request/input/comment (if you want).

BillSeifertBasic MemberPosts:226

22 Oct 2011 10:29 PM

Thanks, Paul. I have found it, and sent my suggestion to the CRB. I've got my conformation number.

Bill

rallyfan555Basic MemberPosts:227

23 Oct 2011 10:58 AM

I've been following these threads on saving SSC for a while. I don't have a dog in this fight. At least not yet anyway. I looked at SSC a couple years ago, went crapcan racing instead, then used said crapcan car to obtain my SCCA novice permit this last spring. I'm looking to build my own "affordable" racecar over the winter so I can race w/SCCA. My experience w/SCCA club racing is obviously very limited so I don't know if my thoughts are even welcome in this discussion. I do know what it's like to try to get past all of the start-up costs to go road racing: truck, trailer, car, cage, HANS, transponder, safety gear, etc. Here it goes anyway.

People are not racing in SSC because other classes (SCCA or otherwise) are doing a better job of letting them race the cars they want to drive, at a prep level they enjoy, and at a cost they can afford. These other classes are providing more competition now as they have more participants. If SSC is to be saved, it must do a better job of appealing to the members who are just getting started in road racing or are currently racing in T*, IT*, SM, NASA, Chumpcar, etc. Additionally it could be positioned as a stepping stone to those classes.

Here's my suggestion: Cars people want to race: Look across the board at what cars are popular amongst racers and enthusiasts and include them. E30/E36 BMW's, all Miatas, MR2's, Civics, CRX's, VW Golfs/Jettas, etc. should all be there. There are others as well. Some of them are old. So what? Mix in new ones as well, just make sure they're ones that enthusiast racers really want to drive. Not ones that they have to buy just because of the class.

Prep level: It's pretty much set by the showroom stock philosophy. This is OK as it's certainly adds minimal cost. Maybe interiors should be allowed to be removed to allow the participants to move the car into/out of SSC and other classes. I'm thinking roll cage design here. The Spec B cars won't have interiors after all.

Affordability: Y'all will probably either dismiss me and my post as rubbish or flame me out of existence for this, but that's OK. Make SSC a street tire class based on the 140+ treadwear rules that the Solo folks are administering. It's been a runaway success in Solo, it works for two "crapcan" endurance racing groups, it works for track days and time trials, it will work here. It's proven that they save the racers a lot of money while still allowing 1G cornering. Some of the companies producing these tires pay contingency in Solo, so it's not unreasonable to think that they might in SSC as well. One could even argue that street tires are truer to the original SS philosophy than R-compounds.

That's it. Flame away.

SundialRacingSouthNew MemberPosts:

23 Oct 2011 12:22 PM

Rallyfan,
You bring up a really good point,Lemons and ChumpCar have zero appeal to me, and because of that I never thought of how that type of racing might be the place the "new" crop of racers are starting. Is much as I hate to admit it SCCA might not be the place for entry level prep racing...

Maybe we should try to figure out how to get some of the "crapcan" racers over...

The tire thing sounds like a great idea, I think Joel tried this before with no luck. I'm sure Joel can fill us in on why it crashed and burned..

I spent $25,000 this year on tires to race in an amateur class(we did a lot of testing but still that is freakin crazy)..

Seeing that number in print makes me sick, but maybe it is an intervention of sorts... Isn't that the first step to recovery, admitting that you have a problem??

Actually the number is $31,000 if you include the rubber that I bought to run the Grand-Am race........

And if you are thinking of running a few pro BSpec races and want to be competitive plan on spending 10k+ per race..

Jmac36New MemberPosts:

23 Oct 2011 05:11 PM

"And if you are thinking of running a few pro BSpec races and want to be competitive plan on spending 10k+ per race."

Ok, I'll bite.... what in the world makes you think you will spend 10K per race? I can't for the life of me figure out what you could do, other than trash a tub/chassis, that would make you spend that much. But then I'm kinda cheap like Joel!

twin_turborx7Veteran MemberPosts:1660

23 Oct 2011 07:22 PM

Jmac36 wrote:

"And if you are thinking of running a few pro BSpec races and want to be competitive plan on spending 10k+ per race."

Ok, I'll bite.... what in the world makes you think you will spend 10K per race? I can't for the life of me figure out what you could do, other than trash a tub/chassis, that would make you spend that much. But then I'm kinda cheap like Joel!

$2500 entry (assuming entry fee is less than touring, gts, gt, if not $3800 (+$1300)$3600 3 sets tires (minimum) bought from GA or WC, 1200 a set (cheaper I hope)$1000 consumables (brake pads, rotors, that gunk)$200 track gas$750 towing there and back (more for you Joe since Detroit, Mosport 2 of 3 tracks, Miller the other)that's over 8k and you just made it in the gate.Add multiple "single adjustable shocks ala carte hanging in your trailer and 10k easyDetroit, mosport and miller 3 tracks b-spec confirmed. Rumor has it 30 minute race, few minutes break, another 30 minute race and the a 45 minute race the following day finale..I don't know about you but that's a pretty penny to me ;)Me thinks GAm (and WC) missing opportunity for GA style, 2 drivers per car (split expenses), at 8-10k per weekend not sure who is going to pay that much to a guy like you Joe to break even to drive a b-spec car when you could get a better/faster ride for less (non bspec) ;) and that assumes you are not interested in making money renting one ;)

SundialRacingSouthNew MemberPosts:

23 Oct 2011 07:37 PM

Don't forget about the one time fees that are hard to amortize over 1-2 races, WC media package $1,500.00 +/-, GA and/or WC credentials..GA is $600.00

You are not going to be able to show up the morning of the race and unload, there are strict times that usually make you get there a day earlier. At the GA race I did at M-O, practice day was Thursday, Qually was Friday and race on Sat. Hopefully you have a nice boss like I do that lets me come and go as I please..

The pace(on and off track) of a pro race makes the Runoffs seem like a track day..

jlipper81Veteran MemberPosts:1180

23 Oct 2011 11:37 PM

So....to answer your question about using tires with the Solo rules.....Hoosier doesn't make a street tire - case closed! Since the small handful of board and crb members make the rules for all 40,000 members, their personal friendships, politics and own interests are what governs what happens.

When my letter was read on a telephone call regarding the tire proposal, several members on the telephone laughed and moved onto the next topic.

These tunnel minded individuals couldn't see or care to hear about the bigger plan, etc.

Take this scenario I proposed - - Use the Solo rules for tires (yes it worked for years in SS racing on shaved street dot tires in this club) - It opens the door to 20+ manufactured brand tires - Companies like BFGoodrich could then take the money spent on race tire molds, compound develpment, etc, etc and put it into serious prize and contingency money (like paying all the driver that show up and race, etc) - Tires that last for multiple weekends - Cars that don't need suspension kits because grip is limited by tire hardness - More tire dealers, and support at tracks because it opens the door to any local tire dealer/supplier - reducing the overall cost of racing

Sounds too good to be true because it is......personal influence and politics will get in the way of what the membership wants.Now let me say that SOME people will jump on here and say that they did this and they ran that....blah blah blah.....there are more circle tracks and crap car races going on in this country every night of the week using 150, 200 even 300 plus tire rating successfully.....BUT the few decision makers making all the decisions for you and me LAUGH AT SENSIBLE SUGGESTIONS.

I for one would have liked harder tires that are easier to obtain, last longer are supported by more retail outlets and would possibly win me more dollars from less cash strapped manufacturers.

So Rallyfan - GO FOR IT! I support you 110%, write in and ask the CRB about the tire rule,

Best of luck - Joel

RX7 KLRVeteran MemberPosts:1814

24 Oct 2011 01:23 PM

jlipper81 wrote:So....to answer your question about using tires with the Solo rules.....
Hoosier doesn't make a street tire - case closed! Since the small handful of board and crb members make the rules for all 40,000 members, their personal friendships, politics and own interests are what governs what happens.

When my letter was read on a telephone call regarding the tire proposal, several members on the telephone laughed and moved onto the next topic.

These tunnel minded individuals couldn't see or care to hear about the bigger plan, etc.

Take this scenario I proposed -
- Use the Solo rules for tires (yes it worked for years in SS racing on shaved street dot tires in this club)
- It opens the door to 20+ manufactured brand tires
- Companies like BFGoodrich could then take the money spent on race tire molds, compound develpment, etc, etc and put it into serious prize and contingency money (like paying all the driver that show up and race, etc)
- Tires that last for multiple weekends
- Cars that don't need suspension kits because grip is limited by tire hardness
- More tire dealers, and support at tracks because it opens the door to any local tire dealer/supplier
- reducing the overall cost of racing

Sounds too good to be true because it is......personal influence and politics will get in the way of what the membership wants.
Now let me say that SOME people will jump on here and say that they did this and they ran that....blah blah blah.....there are more circle tracks and crap car races going on in this country every night of the week using 150, 200 even 300 plus tire rating successfully.....BUT the few decision makers making all the decisions for you and me LAUGH AT SENSIBLE SUGGESTIONS.

I for one would have liked harder tires that are easier to obtain, last longer are supported by more retail outlets and would possibly win me more dollars from less cash strapped manufacturers.

So Rallyfan - GO FOR IT! I support you 110%, write in and ask the CRB about the tire rule,

Best of luck - Joel

Joel, you may know SSC, but you don't know Solo. This is a laughable suggestion. The 140 TW rule is only used for one small - popular, but small - category in Solo. It is only used in Street Touring, where each of the five classes has a specific wheel and tire size limitation across all of the cars in the class. They cater to a very short list of competitive cars, with any even shorter list of tire sizes. As for the manufacturers opening up their checkbooks because they saved money on R&amp;D, you are dreaming, the contingency programs that are in place for those classes offer a fraction of what the DOT R companies offer. 20+ manufacturers? There are currently two brands on top in ST Solo, one caters to the small diameter cars, and one to bigger sizes - and only one offers contingency. There are others that offer contingency to the category, but they do not have a competitive product, so the program is not utilized.

The 140 TW rule is not used in other Solo categories for a number of reasons... The size range of competitive 140 TW tires is simply not available in quantities to fit the variety of cars. Depending on the size you need there is little to no cost savings when buying an ST VS R tire - plus you are adding the cost of shaving. Create a 140 TW rule for a bigger base of customers and it is only a matter of time before the "street tires" get as fast as "race tires". The manufacturers have already told us (I served three years on the SEB) that they can build a tire to fit any rule we give them. You do realize the Feds don't actually verify tread wear on each tire model a manufacturer produces?

And do you really want to further slow down the slowest cars on the track? Mixed field racing at Natls is already a crap shoot, now you want to take away the corner speed too?

btw, you buddies at BFG, they have no competitive 140 tire for Solo. You should get on them. ;)

dhrmx5Advanced MemberPosts:970

24 Oct 2011 03:03 PM

Thanks for the kind words guys, you're making me tear up. :)

Joel, I did see your post and I am all for it. Nice try with the Hyundai, it was on a very short list of cars I was looking at for SSC this year. I finally decided it was too heavy. Bought a Focus SVT but just ran out of time to mess with it. Probably do it this year.

Paul, we have ran it up the flagpole several times. I actually bought the cars over 6 years ago as I was sure that I could get them classified (who knew?)They are just sitting here waiting to get built.

Bill, do you still have your Civic?

dhrmx5Advanced MemberPosts:970

24 Oct 2011 03:16 PM

rjohnson999 wrote:

I'll tell what I don't do. I don't get on message boards pretending to speak for other people when my real objective is to create a better market for my business. Time for you to develop a new marketing plan. One that's based on reality, not something that's a figment of your imagination. The interest in B-Spec is more credible than your claims. Your personal dislike of front wheel drive cars isn't going to carry much weight with anyone.

C'mon now, at least tell me you stayed at a Holiday Inn Express recently so I can give some credence to your opinions...

Business? Marketing plan? Surely you jest. If what I am doing has a plan it's news to me. I, like Joel, just like trying to find that hidden jewel in the GCR that everyone else has overlooked. That and driving Miatas.

JCEBasic MemberPosts:144

24 Oct 2011 03:55 PM

As an SS racer I would likely support a tire rule like that mentioned since it would reduce costs for all drivers, but it sounds like this plan may not be feasible. It is a good discussion though because there doesn't appear to be much downside.

I do not support the Miata in SSC; I haven't done any research on the topic but am basing my opinion on National events at Road America and think the car would be an overdog. Any Spec Miata that is even close to competitve, no matter the year of the car, is faster than the SSC cars on the straights, and much faster in the corners. Take away some of the handling in SSC trim and the car would be slowed but not enough, especially at 2,500 pounds and RWD so tire wear would not be an issue, as opposed to FWD. I'm not anti-RWD but the Miata, no matter the year, is extremely developed and faster than the current SSC cars, thus allowing it in SSC would do more damage than good.

mcolangelo2005New MemberPosts:

24 Oct 2011 04:09 PM

RX7 KLR wrote:

The 140 TW rule is not used in other Solo categories for a number of reasons... The size range of competitive 140 TW tires is simply not available in quantities to fit the variety of cars. Depending on the size you need there is little to no cost savings when buying an ST VS R tire - plus you are adding the cost of shaving. Create a 140 TW rule for a bigger base of customers and it is only a matter of time before the "street tires" get as fast as "race tires". The manufacturers have already told us (I served three years on the SEB) that they can build a tire to fit any rule we give them. You do realize the Feds don't actually verify tread wear on each tire model a manufacturer produces?

And do you really want to further slow down the slowest cars on the track? Mixed field racing at Natls is already a crap shoot, now you want to take away the corner speed too?

+10000

My daily driver is a 2011 Mazda2. It's a good little car, but it's slow. Whatever you do to these cars, don't make them any slower. In mixed class race groups (which is usually the case), they will be rolling chicanes.

dhrmx5Advanced MemberPosts:970

24 Oct 2011 06:10 PM

JCE wrote:

.

I do not support the Miata in SSC; I haven't done any research on the topic but am basing my opinion on National events at Road America and think the car would be an overdog. Any Spec Miata that is even close to competitve, no matter the year of the car, is faster than the SSC cars on the straights, and much faster in the corners. Take away some of the handling in SSC trim and the car would be slowed but not enough, especially at 2,500 pounds and RWD so tire wear would not be an issue, as opposed to FWD. I'm not anti-RWD but the Miata, no matter the year, is extremely developed and faster than the current SSC cars, thus allowing it in SSC would do more damage than good.

The car that is requested is not only down on power to an SM (118 compared to 128) but is also a configuration that has NEVER been run in SS. Thus no advantage for being "developed". True, it should be fairly easy to get it dialed in.

The car would be giving up open exhaust, 15x7 wheels (for OEM 15x6), nearly 2 inches of track width, unlimited camber, the SM suspension kit (shocks,springs,sway bars), Torsen diff, add 1-2 inches in ride height, and add weight. It will gain better tires, but rim width and minimum camber will negate some of that advantage

Assuming the aftermarket hasn't been snowing us for years on the advantages of all those things I would assume the car would be adversely impacted.

As for doing more harm than good, I can only point out that SSC is a mere ghost of it's former self and is in fact in need of something to help participation. The premise of it being FWD only hasn't cut it.

rallyfan555Basic MemberPosts:227

24 Oct 2011 11:59 PM

Thank you for not being too harsh on me for making a few suggestions. I think I have a little more knowledge to contribute to the discussion regarding the history and relative performance of Miatas. (I've been playing with them in stock or nearly stock form for 10 years now.)

Speaking strictly in stock form:
1990-1993 The NA chassis Miata came out with a 1.6 liter DOHC engine rated at 116 hp.

1994-1995 Displacement was increased to 1.8 liters and horsepower went up to 128 hp. The chassis was also stiffened and the car's weight was increased by approximately 100 lbs. The brakes disc diameter was increased and the rear end ratio changed from 4.30 to 4.10.

1996-1997 OBD2 was introduced and horsepower again rose to 133 hp.

1998 No such thing. Mazda skipped this model year.

1999-2000 Introduction of the NB chassis. The engine was again improved with a better flowing cylinder head and a new intake that featured variable length runners. The tubular exhaust manifold was replaced by a cast iron piece. Output was now up to 140 hp. Weight was actually reduced slightly. Some minor tweaks were made in the front suspension geometry, but I can't remember the details. Visually they're the same. The original 4.30 rear end ratio was restored.

2001-2005 Mazda added variable valve timing and returned to a tubular exhaust manifold. They originally claimed 155 hp, but when folks put the cars on dynos, the power wasn't there. Mazda had a program to re-imburse buyers, but I don't remember the details. The new VVT engine was re-rated at 142 hp. I remember seeing a dyno plot from the time period showing the new and previous generation engines tracking right on top of each other. The 4.10 ratio came back again for 04-05.

Anecdotaly, I own a 99 and have driven an 03 Club Sport Miata several times. The 03 always felt a little stronger than my 99, especially at throttle tip-in. They're very close though. My point: using results from SM probably isn't very valid as all the 1.8 liter engines are being artificially choked down to the level of the early 1.6's which used somewhat crude engine management by comparison. (Think flapper-style AFM's vs. hot wire sensors.)

I can't help too much regarding on-track performance of stock Miatas other than to say that our 93 LE Miata chumpcar with stock suspension feels pretty neutral, but does have occasional inside wheel spin issues from mid corner on with it's worn VLSD and street tires. When we were autocrossing the 99's in C Stock, we ran monstrous front sway bars to help keep the inside rear wheel on the ground in sweeping turns so the Torsen could do it's job. The ability to accelerate through sweepers was the one advantage the Miatas had over the Toyota Spyders. Of course the balance changes a bit as speeds increase for road racing. Losing the Torsen while maintaining the rear swaybar, limiting droop travel for the inside rear, would hinder them. However I'm not comfortable speculating publicly how they would fall relative to the other cars in SSC.

-Chris

JCEBasic MemberPosts:144

25 Oct 2011 10:52 AM

dhrmx5 wrote:

The car that is requested is not only down on power to an SM (118 compared to 128) but is also a configuration that has NEVER been run in SS. Thus no advantage for being "developed". True, it should be fairly easy to get it dialed in.

The car would be giving up open exhaust, 15x7 wheels (for OEM 15x6), nearly 2 inches of track width, unlimited camber, the SM suspension kit (shocks,springs,sway bars), Torsen diff, add 1-2 inches in ride height, and add weight. It will gain better tires, but rim width and minimum camber will negate some of that advantage

Assuming the aftermarket hasn't been snowing us for years on the advantages of all those things I would assume the car would be adversely impacted.

As for doing more harm than good, I can only point out that SSC is a mere ghost of it's former self and is in fact in need of something to help participation. The premise of it being FWD only hasn't cut it.

I agree with you Dave and stated in my first post that the Miata would be slowed, but not enough to bring it back to SSC speeds IMO (more than five seconds at Road Am). It appears from the other post that the newer Miatas are restricted in SM so the SSC version may be even faster in a straight line, and that the '01+ likely has equal power to the '99. Also according to the other post your HP numbers are off.

I think part of the reason SSC numbers are down recently is because of overdog cars being moved to SSC and dominating at the Runoffs. Just because SSC is struggling, I don't support classing cars that don't fit the performance level. I say this in respect Dave--I don't think you would push to class the Miata or build any unless you knew it would be very fast; you stated you had a FWD car to build for SSC so it seems it can't be simply a RWD thing.

dhrmx5Advanced MemberPosts:970

25 Oct 2011 11:28 AM

The other post is nice but I am going to trump him with knowledge gained from 20 years of owning and racing Miatas.

A stock 99 will make 118hp give or take 2hp.
A stock 2001 will make 116hp give or take 2hp but has a few ft/lbs better trq, due to the vvt head.

I am talking bone stock engines. This is wheel HP

A 99 SM makes between 124-128 despite it's restrictor because of the cylinder head porting that is allowed, open exhaust, air/fuel and timing mods, etc.

The 99 intake manifoldis also capable of making more HP than the 2001+

Jmac36New MemberPosts:

25 Oct 2011 07:32 PM

Dave, sorry to be negitive here, but while you might be correct that a street 99 will do 118~ on the dyno, a SSB preped 99 will make 130-132 on a good load cell dyno. As a reference, the top running spec miatas, with our tuning, will make 119-121 on the very same dyno.

We are currently working on the 01-05 spec cars and tuning, and while I won't give ya numbers here( gotta pay to play!lol) I will tell you the old myth about the intake is just that, a myth.

So, all that said, and figuring on the weight of the Miata, and the fact it does not streer and drive with the same end(tires are nice to have at the end of a long race), you see why I really don't agree with you on tossing them into c. Sorry!